The Portland daily press., 1887-09-09

The accuser and the accused have given
their versions Of the alleged attempt to bride
amember of the New Hampshire legislature
Senator Sawyer, the accuser, says:
Last Wednesday forenoon ] was called from
the Senate chamber by the sergcant-at-arms;
met Mr.. Pierce in the reception room, and after
saying to me some things complimentary TO my
standing in the Senate he asked me how the sen
ate stood on the railroad question; told him thai
thought, and said that was strong man in the
Senate, and could have Sc, 600 il would speak
for the Boston g. Maine bill.
Mr.. Pierce's version of the same converse.
ton is this:
cord last Wednesday, and met actntor Sawyer in
tne sergeant alarms room; Sal q; Il came up Ia
near you tax regarding the lard -, he did not
want 70 talk lard, but said the rlroad question
was lne great lining he said that the Concord road
would give I'VE, him 5000 for speech, and the Bos-
ton q Maine would give him IS 900 FOR a speech
we both laughed, and took il as a stupendous
Joke; tne following day saw Sawyer, and talked
win nm about the lard bill; he was very pleas
anu ne was going 10 Sunapee thu afternoon and
would meet me on the O'Clock Il IN at Sunapee ;
nj Sawyer met my party and was introduced to
hours and half perhaps Friday afternoon saw
him ON the lake; 1ir. Sllloway said to me early
IN inls session. DO you feel friendly to our
any use TO him he should appreciate il. That
was al hat was said; had no authority from
III: suilo"ay 10 use money in any way in this
1t is impossible to reconcile these two ac-
counts or to explain Mr.. Sawyer's version
on any other hypothesis than that Pierce in
tended to brihe him to support the Hazen
Dill. Pierce can be acquitted only by reject
Ing the testimony Of Sawyer as a whole cloth
falsehood, manufactured for the purpose of
creating prejudice against the Boston &
Maine railroad in order to defeat the Hazen
Dill. Perhaps as the investigation proceeds
evidence may be forthcoming that will tend
to corroborate the story of one or the other of
these men, AS, however, no third party was
tat the conversation that is not likely
The character Of the two men, ana the prob
abilities of their stories will doubtless be the
principal reliance of the committee in iudp-
ing winch has told the truth and which lied.
''i,AoS us now that committee has 90.
i'S manu- H. IL would not be a bad idea to ex-
sonu 'he scope OF its investigation and
INQUIRE not only what Pierce has been doing
out also what the rest of the swarm of at
torneys In the employ of the Boston e. Maine
ana concord roads have been up TO- Very
few OF them have been engaged in arg,;ns
the merits OF the two rival bills before the
railroad committee, yet the general testimo
ny is that they have all bren as busy
as bees If they have been arguing with the
members privately 1t would be interesting 10
know just what the nature of their argu-
ment hasbeen. The public has strong suspi.
clon that the presence of so many "attor-
neys" was not needed to present legitimate
considerations to the Legislature in behalf of
the two rival bills. 1t may be that the ser
vices of some of them have been gratuitous,
that the welfare, or what they conceived to
De the welfare, of the State has called them
70 Concord. and that the two contending roads
are IN no way responsible for them. If this
pe 90 II would rebound greatly to the credit
u Tue State tomakeitso appear for it would
snow that in the patriotism of her attorneys
view hampshire surpassed the great MAORI
ty Of her sister commemorative